to think our children will not forgive us if we don't sort Brexit out

[HurricaneFloss]

DFiL voted Leave. He's not thick and he had his reasons but, to be frank, he's 80 and not going to have to live with the consequences long term. Especially, if the NHS don't manage to stockpile his multiple medications in the event of a No Deal.

AIBU to think we all need to kick up an almighty stink to ensure that our Government makes a deal that will protect our children's futures - even if that means remaining. Jacob Rees Mogg and his ERG buddies predict it could be 50 years for the UK to see the benefits of leaving the EU. That's too late for my DD.

Austerity has damaged enough lives, we can't let Brexit do more harm. It's no good shrugging and saying "Leave won". If this isn't sorted out there will be no winners.

But the fact we can’t really leave - even if we wanted to - is becoming clearer and clearer. We are too far gone down the eu road

So how come I can - ostensibly at least - help vote out the current govt but I can’t see us changing our ‘trading bloc’ provider, even if that is my democratic wish?

Go back 2 years ... to when you voted Leave. Tell me what plan you were voting for to remove the UK from the EU, show me what it said, and what each step was going to be, and what the timescales were, and the risk/reward assessment of each stage were.

Oh, you can't. Well take it up with the people that told you to vote Leave. Boris Johnson, David Davies, Nigel Farage for starters. You ask them what they are doing to bring what you voted for into being.

Another lie Brexiteers like to get away with - when people let them - is to accuse Remainers of insisting it's "impossible" to leave the UK. As far as I know, no remainer has ever said that - even the leaders of the Remain campaign. What they did say - and continue to say, was that if you wanted to "leave the EU" then you had better have a good plan for doing so.

There's a saying in my line of work ... failure to plan on your part does not constitute a crisis on mine.

It's only now - after being conned out of their vote - that some people are starting to realise what the EU was actually doing for Britain all that while. Not unlike those people that couldn't see the need for a chimney breast in their house, knocked it out only to discover it was supporting a wall. Which is not a bad analogy, actually (I wonder how many Brexiteers have read this far). No one would say it's impossible to remove the chimney breast. But that it might need a bit of planning to make sure the wall is supported before you knock it out.

By the same token, Leavers should have had a plan before they triggered Article 50. Which - if you can not lie about not remembering - was strongly advised against at the time.

My point was that such bad predictions show how much we are locked into the eu project - an unhealthy reliance upon a foreign organisation

which we are members of ...

And there's that word again ... foreign. So much for humanity then.

The Uk hasn’t been self sufficient in food for a couple of centuries. Some countries are totally self sufficient,for example Australia and also big food exporters ( Australia produces enough food to feed 80 million people and exports a much of its surplus to Japan) . It doesn’t matter that the uk is not self sufficient as long as it can trade and get trade deals with those who are and have surplus to export. Post Brexit, food is likely to be dearer and more seasonal but that’s no bad thing. There’s a lot of waste of cheap crap quality food at the moment. The short term disruption post Brexit is not likely to last more than a week or two.

unhealthy reliance upon a foreign organisation

Just bewildering.

How do you ration in a modern society where people eat fast food and ready meals?

In 1939 everyone cooked from scratch. Therefore rationing was much easier to actually do.

Lets talk about our food security and how we are less self sufficient for food than we were in 1939 too.

Or how if we leave without a deal, that means we also lose all the tariff free produce from most of the rest of the world too, cos thats all covered by the EU FTA. We won't have those deals replaced immediately in many cases, so we would face huge price rises on those items too.

Falling back on to WTO terms is fab. Except we haven't worked that out yet either and our membership could be partly limited / blocked for some time over issues like the Falklands.

Which the EU no longer have an obligation to back us over.

And we don't even know what 'falling back on to WTO terms' is likely to look like. Yesterday the US and Japan released a statement committing themselves to reforming the WTO. Which might mean in a few years time WTO terms are really unfavourable to the UK. Plus since we are not currently a WTO member, who is to say that we will have influence over what WTO reform might look like.

Its fucked up. It really is.

Yes, things need to change. In many many areas. But the way to fix a broken arm isn't to shoot yourself in the head.

As for EU dependency and decisions being made without us and against us. WELL IF PEOPLE LIKE FARAGE BOTHERED TO TURN UP AND DO THEIR ACTUAL JOBS then that arguement might have a touch more bloody credibility. Instead fuckwits kept voting for a known freeloader!

You know what I'd love. To see what all the posters here on MN back in 2016. It'd be fascinating to see.

Unfortunately the draw back of name change on MN makes that impossible.

Which is a real damn shame.

Cabbages to Nottingham from lincs ignores the uks history as a western nation state

To clarify, you're saying that there are specific bracketed historical reference dates within which we may consider a particular union to hold special validity, in which trade/movement/"dependency" between areas is "healthy" and perhaps "natural"?

So for example the ancient kingdoms of Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria and so on might lie outside the bracketed dates, as would the dates preceding the Acts of Union (and which ones?), and therefore the United Kingdom post-Act of Union 1800 is the natural, healthy and definitely historic correct unit of togetherness in which we need feel no special concern about the movement of cabbages or people.

Whereas the European Union does not qualify because it does not lie within some particular date bracket and we must get terribly concerned about procuring builders, medicine or car engines from them as an "outside body".

How do we all feel about the incorporation of Middlesex into Greater London in the 1960s? That sounds rather unhistorically recent. I think the residents of Barnet should stage a revolt against their unhealthy dependency on the outside body of Kensington and Chelsea, for having the temerity to supply the union of Greater London with the Natural History Museum.

You know what I'd love. To see what all the posters here on MN back in 2016. It'd be fascinating to see. Unfortunately the draw back of name change on MN makes that impossible.

A little AI pixie dust can extract posting profiles. How else do you think we know when the bots are out ?

I seriously hope nobody really thinks name changing is a cloak of invisibility ?

How do we all feel about the incorporation of Middlesex into Greater London in the 1960s?

Please don't start. Even into the 90s there were people campaigning for it's return, and trying to get people to use "MIDDX" on their addresses.

(I was bought up in "Middlesex" and a lot of school textbooks were stamped "MCC") .

Middlesex and Greater London. We have Lancashire and Cheshire die hards up here in the NW.

The Lancashire types are still campaigning I believe.

It might explain something about the Birmingham Leave vote, if I tell you that a regular phone-in topic of debate on local radio is about the naming of the boroughs, and whether it should be reversed.

That's the naming that happened in nineteen seventy fucking four

Apparently "Sandwell" doesn't exist in reality.

God, I miss London

(The joke is, to anyone from outside the area it's all "Birmingham" anyway. Same way Salford is Manchester for Londoners ...)

Ah, but the true measure of whether Birmingham is real place is whether they consider the importation of pork pies from Leicestershire as being an unhealthy reliance on a foreign body.

Ah, but the true measure of whether Birmingham is real place is whether they consider the importation of pork pies from Leicestershire as being an unhealthy reliance on a foreign body.

They're very defensive of their baltis, hypocritical c**s

Not just pork pies, but Melton Mowbray pork pies.

Of course, if GI goes, Melton Mowbray pork pies could then actually be from anywhere.

The usual mixture of emotion, misinformation, exaggeration, panic and downright propaganda, at least some of it from people in the pay of Soros or the EU.

Brexit will be far from problem free but it will be fine.

What our children really wouldn't forgive us for is giving their country away, finding themselves living in a vassal state ruled from Brussels by unelected, unaccountable foreigners instead of a self-governing democracy.

It ought to be obvious just looking at the EU's timeline from the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, via the EEC in 1957, the EU in 1993 and the 2009 Lisbon Constitution they were forced to rename to sidestep negative referendum results in France and Denmark, not to mention the Euro and Schengen, the EU only ever gets bigger and more dominant, paying less and less attention to the wishes of the citizens of the countries affected. It is only ever going to end one way, as a technocratic empire with no place for democracy or self-governing nation states.

If that's what you want for your kids, go for it, ideally by moving abroad.

I certainly won't be putting up with it for mine.

^^

I found this 1972 image on Twitter, which rather suggests that the people were told that what they were joining wasn't just a bare trading arrangement.

As for the "bugger orf abroad, you traitor" narrative, that's kind of funny because whenever somebody says that they have moved abroad, Leavers then respond with "you've abandoned your country, you traitor!"

It ought to be obvious just looking at the EU's timeline from the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, via the EEC in 1957, the EU in 1993

The ECSC, EEC and Euratom all co-existed, and were brought together in 1967 as the EC if you want to show at least a little accuracy.

No one has really answered my question

Why is it sensible to be so utterly reliant on an international organisation? It is a single point of failure

You know what I'd love. To see what all the posters here on MN back in 2016. It'd be fascinating to see

Well I can tell you what I said (under a different name, can't even remember which) in 2016 and that was that I was voting remain because I wanted my son to be able to benefit from the Erasmus scheme and I was concerned about the loss of employment rights that would come after Brexit. Those two things still concern me.

I had no real idea of the complexities of leaving the EU or how much of a mess up our government would make of things, had I known, I'd have been an even more vocal Remainer. For example, I had no idea there would be a problem with flights or food supplies or that we would be heading for a no deal rather than EEA or EEA lite.

elements a copy of the text of the government’s leaflet on the 1975 referendum is available here:

www.harvard-digital.co.uk/euro/pamphlet.htm

And reproduced in original format here:

hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2015/08/the-1975-common-market-referendum-campaign-documents.html

The aims of the Common Market are:

To bring together the peoples of Europe.

To raise living standards and improve working conditions.

To promote growth and boost world trade.

To help the poorest regions of Europe and the rest of the world.

To help maintain peace and freedom.

I’d say that was pretty clear that the EC was not just a trading bloc.

"Why is it sensible to be so utterly reliant on an international organisation? It is a single point of failure"

Because that organisation is one of the world's biggest trading blocs.
Is it better to be utterly reliant on the WTO?

The UN has similar aspirations. Perhaps we should leave that too?

Why is it sensible to be so utterly reliant on an international organisation?

Wasn't it a "foreign organisation" upthread? My answer was, I don't consider the EU as "foreign".

Also, define "utterly". I would consider "utterly reliant" as being, say, a foetus in a uterus. Whereas having self-inflicted idiotic delays or shortages in supplies, increases in cost of living, damage to the economy, departure of healthcare workers, loss of jobs and so on - not "utterly dependent" but rather just the entirely expected shit consequences of bailing out of well-established existing systems.

And anyway so what if there are these bad consequences? Don't Leavers keep saying that Freedom is worth Any Price? So why quibble about people discussing the Price?

I do like the cute replacement of "foreign" with "international" though.